Why would the expectation be that it helps affordability? On an individual basis, having access to more money means you may be able to afford a home that would not have been within your means.

In aggregate, everyone having more access to more money means inflation.

Access to more money for a specific good or service means inflation concentrated in that category. See: college tuition and home prices in the U.S.

> Access to more money for a specific good or service means inflation concentrated in that category. See: college tuition and home prices in the U.S.

100x this. Financial policy giving everyone access to cheap mortgages has got to be one of the stupidest things governments have done in the last 30 years.

Of course not; it encourages home prices to keep going up, because people have access to another source to fund home purchases. The problem is, of course, that tapping your 401k-equiavalent is a long-term bad move unless you have a way to quickly put that money back without skimping on other things.

It worked out pretty well for many of my friends' parents, who bought houses in the American West, raised their kids, and then sold their now incredibly valuable homes to retire to small towns.

Doesn't work so well when houses are expensive.

The problem with that is it only allows a maximum of $25K, which in Toronto's market barely makes an impact on the downpayment.

It's $35k now.

That's better, but still far away from a significant useful amount. When I bought my first place in 1999, my downpayment was $12K which fit nicely in the allowed amount. Not so much anymore.